Exa key pool status

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses key masking and that reset clears cooldowns and disables something, but it leaves important behavior ambiguous: what exactly is disabled, whether reset is destructive or reversible, and whether reset applies to all keys or only the aliased key.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two dense sentences with no filler. The key metrics and the reset side effect are front-loaded and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description covers the status metrics and reset effect, but for a mutation-capable tool with no annotations and no output schema, it should more completely specify reset scope, side effects, and default behavior. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 50%, and the schema already documents alias while action lacks a schema description. The description adds meaning for action=reset, but does not clarify status behavior when action is omitted or how alias interacts with reset beyond what the schema says.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb and resource: show health, cooldowns, requests, and tracked spend for each Exa key. It also distinguishes the reset mode, and the tool is obviously separate from the search/agent siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies status monitoring and describes what action=reset does, but it does not explicitly say when to use status versus reset, when reset is appropriate, or whether an alias is required when resetting a single key.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.